pc-minutes-oct-12-20
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
This meeting was held via Webex in accordance with the local emergency declaration made by
the City under Minn. Stat. § 12.37. In accordance with that declaration, beginning on March 16,
2020, all Planning Commission meetings held during the emergency were conducted
electronically. The City used Webex to conduct this meeting and members of the public were
able to monitor the meetings by watching it on Comcast cable channel 16, by streaming it on
CCXmedia.org, or by dialing in to the public call‐in line.
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 by Chair Blum.
Roll Call
Commissioners present: Rich Baker, Ron Blum, Adam Brookins, Andy Johnson, Noah Orloff, Lauren
Pockl, Ryan Sadeghi, Chuck Segelbaum
Staff present: Jason Zimmerman – Planning Manager, Myles Campbell – Planner
Council Liaison present: Gillian Rosenquist
2. Approval of Agenda
Chair Blum asked for a motion to approve the agenda.
MOTION made by Commissioner Pockl, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to approve the agenda
of October 12, 2020. Staff called a roll call vote and the motion carried unanimously.
3. Approval of Minutes
Chair Blum asked for a motion to approve the minutes from September 14, 2020 and minutes from
September 29, 2020.
MOTION made by Commissioner Baker, seconded by Commissioner Johnson to approve both sets
of minutes. Staff called a roll call vote and the motion carried unanimously.
4. Discussion – 2020 Land Use/Zoning Study
Myles Campbell, Planner, reintroduced the topic of land‐use tables within the zoning code.
The goals for this study are:
to update the zoning code to match the land use policies of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
to modernize the code so it’s more approachable and understandable for residents and
business owners.
This discussion revolved around commercial uses, this includes retail and service‐based businesses
that see a large amount of customer traffic. Staff reviewed peer communities of comparable size to
Golden Valley and discovered there was a broad range of by right definitions within “retail
businesses” and “service businesses.”
October 12, 2020 – 7 pm
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
October 12, 2020 – 7 pm
2
In Golden Valley’s Commercial District, there are 59 unique uses established as being permitted,
conditional, restricted, or prohibited. Some of these uses are included in the mixed‐use, office, or
industrial districts and often language is inconsistent. For now, staff is focused on uses listed in the
Commercial District and the terminology established will be used for other districts.
With guidance from a previous meeting, staff identified three action items for this study.
Convert existing organization of permitted/conditional/restricted uses in the code to a table
format.
Simplify code by reducing the overall number of defined land uses.
Examine existing conditional or permitted uses that could be handled instead as restricted
uses.
Staff elaborated on restaurants, their varying class levels, and how they’re defined. Campbell went
on to describe the process a potential restaurant proprietor would have to go though to
understand the class definitions of a restaurant. They would need to do this as well as navigate
required meetings and timelines.
Campbell posed these questions to the Board for discussion:
1. Which commercial uses can be removed or consolidated to improve the usability of the
code?
a. Should we keep “General retail services and/or sales…” and also create a similar
catch‐all for service businesses?
2. What uses should be handled as a restricted use instead of a conditional use?
a. Do commissioners already have ideas on the restrictions themselves, or do they
want staff to assist?
3. What needs to stay as a conditional use?
Chair Blum opened the discussion, Commissioner Baker said he thinks language consolidation will be
easy to tackle, however items 2 and 3 are about the distinction between conditional and restricted
uses. He asked for criteria to define a use as conditional or restricted. Baker added that it would be
helpful to review previous CUPs to understand conditions. Jason Zimmerman defined specifics for
each use, added that restricted uses should have a standard and conditional uses will be tailored case
by case. Commissioner Johnson pointed to other administrative processes such as the Administrative
PUD Amendment and cautioned against the Planning Commission giving up its regulatory oversight
and responsibility to make recommendations. Johnson added that criteria would help ground the
process and could avoid spot‐zoning. Commissioner Pockl suggested steps in editing process by
eliminating what was unclear first. The discussion moved on to restricted and non‐conforming use
and what a list of criteria could be without adding regulations. Staff mentioned reviewing this with
the City Attorney to understand when this can and cannot be managed. Staff went on to talk about
uses that conditions tend to cluster around and gave automotive uses and uses revolving around
children as two broad examples. The conversation continued about the benefits of existing criteria so
business owners will have information upfront. The need for conscious equity was brought up by
Baker and staff expanded on this and Johnson’s comments on value‐based decision making.
Staff directed the conversation back to Pockl’s point about process and editing. Commissioners
reviewed the table presented by staff and discussed language clarity. The need for evolving
City of Golden Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting
October 12, 2020 – 7 pm
3
modifications was brought up as uses change through the years. Commissioners discussed staff
grouping together certain uses to reduce the number on a table but the need for specificity to create
early transparency was also discussed.
Staff suggested they remove outdated items and information, provide new groupings of uses for
consolidation, and then break each group to uses. That information will be presented at a future
meeting for more feedback. Commissioners considered a few items to group by and others that may
need to be evaluated case by case.
Pockl asked staff about approval process for a particular use outside of a CUP or PUD. Staff stated
there wasn’t a requirement that an owner check with the City in advance. Golden Valley doesn’t have
a business license program and the City often finds out after the fact, sometimes that use isn’t
permitted in an area and there’s a process after that. Pockl followed up that it may be helpful for
people to know the process they need to follow in advance of opening a certain business. Staff
responded that there are district wide standards and regulations and sometimes that helps address
these issues in advance.
There was no vote and staff stated they’ll return with this item after analysis, likely in November.
Televised portion of the meeting concluded at 8:34pm
5. Council Liaison Report
Council Member Rosenquist shared that 30% of Golden Valley residents had already voted early in the
election and that average was around 180 voters per day. She mentioned the Just Deeds presentation
that was made at the most recent City Council meeting regarding racial restrictive covenants.
Rosenquist gave a preview of the upcoming Council/Manager meeting topics, including a PMP
discussion on road widths and crime‐free and disorderly conduct ordinances currently in the City Code.
She also reported that the members for the Facilities Study Task Force had been selected and that the
deadline to apply for the Police Task Force was coming up.
6. Reports on Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
None.
7. Other Business
None.
8. Adjournment
MOTION by Commissioner Pockl to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, and approved
unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:45 pm.
________________________________
Adam Brookins, Secretary
________________________________
Amie Kolesar, Planning Assistant